Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Percival Merewether

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Percival Merewether

  1. There's a difference.... the Rattlers are available to any player willing to craft/buy one from the market..... It's not like that with the Req, is it..? As it stands, you have to buy the DLC to be competitive - luckily we will get rebalancing of other vessels soon.
  2. But isn't this done with Thickness, HP and Crew resistance combined already?
  3. I take it you subscribe to the idea that it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission then..? If I'm in a battle with a bunch of friendlies and tell my mate across the table that I'm gonna blow up the enemy team as well as my own; does that qualify as stating my intent? Should I not tell the people who are actually fighting along side me as well?
  4. Christ...... I retract this message after seeing that video. I hope you're punished accordingly. You clearly wanted to do as much damage as possible with no care for those around you - you're bringing nothing positive to the fight and choose to limit the fun for others purely for your own amusement. You had plenty of time to state your intentions and warn your teammates, instead you deliberately do green-on-green whilst celebrating the destruction of your own team...
  5. If 'MDonnergott Catatafish' was Crew Shocked; the situation may have been completely out of his control. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt - But would have been nice of him to have warned you guys so at the very least you could've braced.
  6. While this is true in theory, it will require the raider to drag the battle out for a full hour - I doubt that will happen. To be on the safe side though, it may be a good idea to prevent the "Recently kill" timer from counting down during battle. Just to avoid kiting of course.
  7. I believe that was covered in great detail in the documentary "Iron Sky" by Timo Vuorensola, Johanna Sinisalo and Michael Kalesniko
  8. Most of this thread has been regarding using AI fleets with unlimited chain as an offensive weapon, thus making it harder for your precious traders to escape because the AI has unlimited chain. This is why I suggested the following: You could also disable the chain/demast button for the attacking party - or are you also in favour of using AI ships to help hunters slow-down and capture traders? Don't be a dick about it, that's not going to get us anywhere.
  9. @NethrosDefectus suggest something that at least on the surface appeared to be an easy tweak for the next patch, and you dismiss it saying the developers should add content instead. Why don't you make a seperate new thread in which you suggest the 'new and improved' content that you have in mind? - and while you're here...: tell us why the developers should not limit chain for the AI.
  10. limiting AI chain as suggested by @NethrosDefectus would be the best approach, a more drastic step could be disabling AI fleets for attackers
  11. The problem isn't when you use it to counter a "super-modded PvP hunter" - the problem is when the "super-modded PvP hunter" brings a fleet-ships for chaining. It's being used actively for hunting, not defence.
  12. As long as you recognise that there's an issue it's fine - you have a list of priorities and I myself believe that the Port UI will bring (and keep) more players in-game than an 'infinite chain'-fix will. But I do tend to agree with @Intrepido and @NethrosDefectus, a UI will only get you so far... We need balancing in all areas rather than "patchy" solutions - The game is really not enjoyable in its current state, the community is way too small and it's getting toxic. We fight the same people again and again + It's almost impossible to play the game without having a 1-2 hour "forum/
  13. Check your PMs in-game and stop pissing about on the forum involving the entire NA community @Hethwill might want to moderate this one
  14. you had a backup of two Connies and several smalls ships coming in - the odds were in your favour... remember to add all the facts. How is this related to this post anyways?
  15. #Iwon'tfightunlessIhavea1v5advantageovermyopponent... You guys just chased me with a 15kn Bellona and a Le Requin that goes 15kn DOWN-wind whilst keeping me tagged with swivels at 500 meters+ You're not much better yourself Right back at ya..
  16. I agree, I've noticed an increase in players using fleetships for chaining - it's becoming a problem... And before somebody brings it up: FAQ: Does it affect me in battle and makes it harder for me to win? Yes...? Is that why I want it fixed..? Yes...? Why? Because if it affects me it likely affects other players as well...
  17. I don't understand this thread...? What can the developers take away from this that will inspire them to make NA better? the only thing 'Skull and bones' and 'Naval Action' have in common is the era in which the two games are played. They are VASTLY different.
  18. Thank you, was indeed confirmed by Vile on Global chat - cheers.
  19. I do not recall Paradox removing content from already released games, I also do not remember a game being unplayable without their DLCs. With that said, once you've played with DLCs you will of course miss the extra features To not stray too far off topic: Let's us all hope that GameLabs does not take the route you are describing - like I said, I understand your concern, but I feel there is a difference between their predominantly single player focused games VS Gamelabs Naval MMO game. We're not disagreeing on how bad an Edinorog DLC would be, I'm certain we're on the same page there
  20. I already feel like I ought to apologise for a rather long post, so here we go... I am sorry! Ideas like this one pops-up all the time on pretty much every game forum, I can understand why.. If you want something implemented it gives the developers of your favorite product an incentive to create and release your idea if you are willing to pay extra for it. There are some things that, in my opinion, should never become a DLC. The Edinorogs are a great example of an in-game feature that gives players an unfair advantage over others - I myself have a huge stack of them in my wareho
  21. Date : 1 June 1794 Result: British tactical victory French strategic victory 1200 British casualties 4000 French casualties What a happy day that was.. 😉
  22. Exactly.. good idea, but detrimental to gameplay... The only way that I'd see any of this work is to completely eliminate all communications with your nation when at sea. I throughly believe this will lead to less OW hunting and limit PvP to the patrol zones + large gank-squads at capitals.
  23. That exactly what I said they don’t need to... let’s say I’m hunting at Bridgetown/Kingstown - the french won’t need any repairs at all because they bring high numbers - I’m there alone.. that’s a death sentence
  • Create New...